feat: add basic behavior tests for buffer reader

[WenyXu]

Add basic behavior tests for buffer reader (p.s. I will rebase this PR after #3865 is merged)

Related

#3735

[Xuanwo]

Hi, the TwoWay/ThreeWay/FourWay refactor isn't complete. Would you prefer to merge them first?

[WenyXu]

Hi, the TwoWay/ThreeWay/FourWay refactor isn't complete. Would you prefer to merge them first?

Sorry, I didn't get it. It sounds like I missed something.

[Xuanwo]

Sorry, I didn't get it. It sounds like I missed something.

We can merge TwoWaysReader and TwoWaysWrite into TwoWay, and refactor all references.

[WenyXu]

Sorry, I didn't get it. It sounds like I missed something.

We can merge TwoWaysReader and TwoWaysWrite into TwoWay, and refactor all references.

OK, I see. I will add tests first and refactor TwoWaysReader and TwoWaysWrite while waiting for CI. 😄

[WenyXu]

Sorry, I didn't get it. It sounds like I missed something.

We can merge TwoWaysReader and TwoWaysWrite into TwoWay, and refactor all references.

BTW where should I place the TwoWay? How about the raw/oio/utils.rs?

[Xuanwo]

BTW where should I place the TwoWay? How about the raw/oio/utils.rs?

How about in raw/enum_utils?

[WenyXu]

BTW where should I place the TwoWay? How about the raw/oio/utils.rs?

How about in raw/enum_utils?

OK 👍

[WenyXu]

Cool, It seems easier than I thought.

BTW, Should I refactor the tests to like the following?

pub async fn test_reader_tail_with_buffer(op: Operator) -> Result<()> {
    build_test_reader_tail(test, |op| op.buffer().. ))
}

[WenyXu]

Hhh, 1 check failed...🥲

[WenyXu]

The fuzz tests were amazing and helpful! I will rebase this PR after #3865 is merged.

[Xuanwo]

Hi, I feel like we are going too far.

Sorry for not making the difference between behavior tests and fuzz tests more clearly in advance. (I promise that I will improve this part in the future).

Behavior tests are tests to simulate user's behavior, they're optimized for reading and maintaining. It's by design to have duplicated code. We try our best to make every test case is separate to each other and could be understood without reading other part of code.

And fuzzing test is to reproduce failures produced by fuzzer. They are designed for easily adding and reproducing auto generated cases.

So please keep behavior tests simple like users can write in their real code.

[WenyXu]

Hi, I feel like we are going too far.

Sorry for not making the difference between behavior tests and fuzz tests more clearly in advance. (I promise that I will improve this part in the future).

Behavior tests are tests to simulate user's behavior, they're optimized for reading and maintaining. It's by design to have duplicated code. We try our best to make every test case is separate to each other and could be understood without reading other part of code.

And fuzzing test is to reproduce failures produced by fuzzer. They are designed for easily adding and reproducing auto generated cases.

So please keep behavior tests simple like users can write in their real code.

Ok, I see. I dropped the refactor commit.

[Xuanwo]

Thanks a lot for the understanding!

[WenyXu]

Thanks a lot for the understanding!

Never mind. 😁

[Xuanwo]

Thanks!